• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

JBL Stage 125C Review (Center Speaker)

Rate this speaker:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 104 58.1%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 65 36.3%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 10 5.6%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    179

Rottmannash

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 11, 2020
Messages
2,969
Likes
2,606
Location
Nashville
No. Almost all the music I play is 2 channel audio. I don't care for the multi-channel upmixing options my AV receiver (or its predecessors) offer.
Sorry. I thought your post was speaking of watching movies with family. Isn't that what we're talking about??
 

stevenswall

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
1,366
Likes
1,075
Location
Orem, UT
Take for example the JBL 29AV-1 that Amir reviewed
It has a rotatable horn, 8 inch woofer. It seems that a single woofer/waveguide combo should work fine shoudn't it? I guess my point is shouldn't a bookshelf speaker with a proper waveguide work fine laying on its side? I guess if not, I am curious why it wouldn't.View attachment 169458
Because you still have an interference pattern when the woofer and tweeter overlap the frequencies they are playing from two points separated by a physical distance.

The JBL you reference still has these cancellations and interference issues, it looks like they just broke them up and scattered them every which way in the vertical dispersion graph which would describe the horizontal dispersion if you put it on its side.

If you don't have any ceiling or floor reflections you are fine because the woofer and tweeter on the X axis aren't playing from two different points in space.

As soon as you put it on its side, now there is space between them.

This is one of the advantages of coaxial speakers.

To make a normal speaker behave like this, in addition to controlling directivity, I think you'd need a crossover with a slope of infinity decibels per infinityith of an octave, and a DSP to track your head in the room to make sure all the frequencies arrived at the same time.

Better solution: don't buy anything non-coaxial unless you're never going to move in the vertical plane and don't have ceiling or floor reflections.
 

Alice of Old Vincennes

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 5, 2019
Messages
1,418
Likes
903
It's not that complicated. Most consumers buying center speakers want/need something that physically fits beneath their TV and doesn't look terrible or totally out of place. They are already a minority compared to the soundbar crowd. For people who prioritize fidelity over form and have some basic knowledge, most horizontal MTM centers are a poor choice. Speaker manufacturers are not stupid. They know their markets far better than the forum members. Low profile centers sell better than monkey coffins. Its not incompetence to make a product that sells.

This forum favors objective measurements as a critical factor in selecting audio components. Folks here are not simply "better informed" than other consumers. We are pursuing different goals and have different priorities. All the marketing BS from manufacturers and their vendors muddles things, but that's nothing new or unique to center speakers.
Designing TV placement under tall center is not difficult.
 

sarumbear

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
7,604
Likes
7,314
Location
UK
They know their markets far better than the forum members. Low profile centers sell better than monkey coffins. Its not incompetence to make a product that sells.
Where will you draw the line between a bad design and snake oil?
 

Bear123

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 27, 2019
Messages
796
Likes
1,370
I guess kinda sick of hearing how horrible and unusable every center speaker supposedly is, based on looking at some measurements of said speakers, that most in the forum have never owned nor even heard.

It seems fairly easy to jump on a bandwagon and bash stuff here.
But the elephant in the room being, this center speaker (MTM Dispersion) issue only became an issue, AFTER reading it was an issue, in several center speaker reviews recently.

Where are the numerous threads OUTSIDE of these reviews lamenting what a great problem it is and how unusable all center speakers are?

I love this forum greatly, but often detect a lot of "Follow the leader" mentality, for lack of a better term.
Anytime something is reviewed as the least bit substandard, several of the same guys, bash it as if it was totally unusable and trash.
Measurements correlate well to sound quality and listener preference. This is well established. So when a speaker has abysmal measurements, it follows that sound quality will be compromised as well. It has nothing to do with "jumping on a bandwagon".

There have been countless threads on AVS forums over the years where owners of 2 way MTM center channels complain about dialogue intelligibility, and their problems are solved when they switch to a good 3 way center. The terrible off axis response of most 2 way MTM center channels reduces sound quality, especially through the vocal range, compared to a more optimal design. Do you have a 2 way center that you are happy with? If so, that's ok. Some folks are really happy with TV speakers, some love soundbars, some are content with 2 way MTM centers, and some prefer a more optimal solution that a 3 way center offers when making the compromise of a horizontal center channel.

Again, its really easy to correlate measurements, generally, to sound quality. If frequency response is down 5-10 dB when moving a little off axis, your going to hear that, a lot. You don't have to go out and buy a bad speaker and listen to it when measurements show you its bad. Again, if thats your preferred method, that's ok too. But I personally am glad to have the objective data that prevents me from wasting time and money on poorly designed and/or poor sound quality products. By the same token, I'm glad to have the objective data available on products that perform well. It led me to the 3 way center channel I currently use, and only cost me $149.
 

wisechoice

Active Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2021
Messages
155
Likes
141
Before I got my KH80, my center speaker was a Marshall Stanmore (the model with optical, which reportedly has better sound quality than the Stanmore II). Its design is TMT, and it's technically a stereo speaker. I found it had reasonable directivity, but my ears are untrained. Can anyone explain why this option wouldn't be chosen by more speaker makers as opposed to MTM? Has anyone measured the horizontal directivity on a speaker with that design?

Sorry if that's a stupid question.
 

SynthesisCinema

Active Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2019
Messages
173
Likes
227
The concentric Hsu CCB-8 with 8" woofer does seem to be a good candidate for a punchy center that can handle big special effects sounds as well as dialog. It's rated for up to 400w input so it can obviously play loud. Considering the experience @amirm had with the smaller Hsu HB-1 absorbing a huge amount of amplifier power without distortion even though only rated up to 250w the CCB-8 should make a killer center for reference level home theater at its modest list price of $369. Laid on its side it's only 10.5" tall.


Looks good, but there is mixed feedback due to hot treble..

As one would predict by its design, there is not much difference in performance between the vertical and horizontal axis. Orientation does little to affect its performance, so it can be used on any of its sides without any serious acoustic penalty. The absence of any lobing artifacts demonstrates why the CCB-8 makes for a good center channel speaker. On traditional center speakers, woofers are aligned on a horizontal plane, and this will cause cancellation artifacts off-axis, sometimes as close as 10 degrees off-axis. This can result in an erratic sound for those who have to sit off to the side of the direct axis of the center speaker. The Hsu CCB-8 has none of these drawbacks. One drawback that it does have is that, since the upper treble on the direct axis is elevated, users may want to aim the tweeter above or below the listening position by 15 to 25 degrees. In my own listening, I aimed the tweeter over my head when seated at the listening position for an approximate 15-degree angle.


 

beagleman

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
1,159
Likes
1,582
Location
Pittsburgh Pa
Measurements correlate well to sound quality and listener preference. This is well established. So when a speaker has abysmal measurements, it follows that sound quality will be compromised as well. It has nothing to do with "jumping on a bandwagon".

There have been countless threads on AVS forums over the years where owners of 2 way MTM center channels complain about dialogue intelligibility, and their problems are solved when they switch to a good 3 way center. The terrible off axis response of most 2 way MTM center channels reduces sound quality, especially through the vocal range, compared to a more optimal design. Do you have a 2 way center that you are happy with? If so, that's ok. Some folks are really happy with TV speakers, some love soundbars, some are content with 2 way MTM centers, and some prefer a more optimal solution that a 3 way center offers when making the compromise of a horizontal center channel.

Again, its really easy to correlate measurements, generally, to sound quality. If frequency response is down 5-10 dB when moving a little off axis, your going to hear that, a lot. You don't have to go out and buy a bad speaker and listen to it when measurements show you its bad. Again, if thats your preferred method, that's ok too. But I personally am glad to have the objective data that prevents me from wasting time and money on poorly designed and/or poor sound quality products. By the same token, I'm glad to have the objective data available on products that perform well. It led me to the 3 way center channel I currently use, and only cost me $149.
1. Measurements correlate well to sound quality and listener preference.........

I think to some degree that is established for sure. I agree. But you are in essence jumping to a conclusion that ANY measurement that is sub optimal will make for a speaker that will be unusable.


2. I Never said I have an MTM center that I was "Happy with"

What I said numerous times, is that the dispersion issue, is being "Played up" by many, and in actual use is NOT nearly as noticeable as some are claiming, it makes the center totally unusable etc.

What we have is 2 schools of describing a flaw. Some say it is the end of the world, I saw a moderate issue. We are dealing with Semantics, not lack of understanding or being clueless and naive in my part.



FYI I have a 2.5 way center, and can hear some mild tonality change when off to the sides, but All voices are still quite decent sounding and can be heard, and do not require close captioning...lol
 
Last edited:

SwampYankee

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
41
Likes
53
Where will you draw the line between a bad design and snake oil?
My definition of "snake oil" is marketing with a primary focus on performance claims with no basis in physics. Products like cable risers are an easy example. Boutique speaker cables or power cables are in that category for me, too. "Bad design", from my perspective, should be judged based on multiple factors, not solely Harman preference scores. I have my own bad experience with 2-way MTM center speakers and know that most are poorly suited for my specific needs. I also understand enough of the acoustic trade-offs with this design to seek an alternative that would physically fit where I need it. That didn't make me question why MTM centers are popular or think that the engineers at Cambridge Audio, who made my old center speaker, are dumb.

The fact that most center speakers sold today are variations on MTMs (or MMTMMs for soundbars) and that most consumers appear satisfied with them shouldn't be ignored or dismissed because they don't align with the ASR crowd's preferences. Like any other product, center speakers are designed to make a profit. Compromises in the design to meet consumer demands are not evidence of laziness or stupidity. Calling the Stage 125c a "bad design" based on the measurements doesn't irritate me; the apparent belief that JBL doesn't understand why the speaker has poor off-axis performance does. That's farcically myopic. I have no doubt that JBL can make a center speaker with excellent performance, as judged by ASR standards. That speaker would likely be either significantly more expensive or have a form-factor that doesn't align with most consumer's needs.

As I've already noted, I use a KEF coax center. It suits my particular needs pretty well. The question of why more manufacturers don't use coax drivers for center speakers is an interesting one. I doubt it's because the engineers are unaware of the trade-offs involved in using them.
 

SwampYankee

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
41
Likes
53
Measurements correlate well to sound quality and listener preference. This is well established. So when a speaker has abysmal measurements, it follows that sound quality will be compromised as well. It has nothing to do with "jumping on a bandwagon".

There have been countless threads on AVS forums over the years where owners of 2 way MTM center channels complain about dialogue intelligibility, and their problems are solved when they switch to a good 3 way center. The terrible off axis response of most 2 way MTM center channels reduces sound quality, especially through the vocal range, compared to a more optimal design. Do you have a 2 way center that you are happy with? If so, that's ok. Some folks are really happy with TV speakers, some love soundbars, some are content with 2 way MTM centers, and some prefer a more optimal solution that a 3 way center offers when making the compromise of a horizontal center channel.

Again, its really easy to correlate measurements, generally, to sound quality. If frequency response is down 5-10 dB when moving a little off axis, your going to hear that, a lot. You don't have to go out and buy a bad speaker and listen to it when measurements show you its bad. Again, if thats your preferred method, that's ok too. But I personally am glad to have the objective data that prevents me from wasting time and money on poorly designed and/or poor sound quality products. By the same token, I'm glad to have the objective data available on products that perform well. It led me to the 3 way center channel I currently use, and only cost me $149.
I agree with this, Bear123. I also believe it is useful to put the "optimal solution" in context. An acoustically optimal option may not be worth the compromises required in other factors (size, form factor, costs, aesthetics, etc.) for a lot of people. This forum places a priority on measured performance. There's nothing wrong with that. The nit I have to pick is the suggestion that MTM designers are somehow stupid or ignorant of the trade-offs required to meet the needs of all the other consumers in the marketplace.
 

sarumbear

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
7,604
Likes
7,314
Location
UK
The fact that most center speakers sold today are variations on MTMs (or MMTMMs for soundbars) and that most consumers appear satisfied with them shouldn't be ignored or dismissed because they don't align with the ASR crowd's preferences.
Do you think wildly different FR for people not sitting at dead centre is a preference? I think it is a requirement unless you are a single person in the house or a person who doesn’t care what others in the room experience.
 

youpassbutter

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 8, 2021
Messages
25
Likes
32
Crutchfield has a sale on the Polk CSi A6 (now $149). Normal retail is $339.
x107CSiA6C-o_open.jpeg
 

sarumbear

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 15, 2020
Messages
7,604
Likes
7,314
Location
UK

Rottmannash

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Nov 11, 2020
Messages
2,969
Likes
2,606
Location
Nashville
Must be a tiny port?
 

beaRA

Active Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
223
Likes
315
Do you think wildly different FR for people not sitting at dead centre is a preference? I think it is a requirement unless you are a single person in the house or a person who doesn’t care what others in the room experience.
You don't seem to be making an earnest attempt to understand his point of view. He made his point clear in the very next post. Different customers have different requirements.
An acoustically optimal option may not be worth the compromises required in other factors (size, form factor, costs, aesthetics, etc.) for a lot of people.
 

beagleman

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
1,159
Likes
1,582
Location
Pittsburgh Pa
Must be a tiny port?

Must be a tiny port?


Yes, and it has 2 larger ports on back.

Polk has the theory, that 2 different sized ports, tuned to the same frequency, will effectively have different rates of transmission of mid frequencies, and will effectively lower the mid range output from inside the ports by having one port on front and other(s) on back, effectively making the midrange output out of phase at listening position.
 

voodooless

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 16, 2020
Messages
10,228
Likes
17,810
Location
Netherlands
Crutchfield has a sale on the Polk CSi A6 (now $149). Normal retail is $339.
x107CSiA6C-o_open.jpeg
Why not put the woofers closer together? The point of offsetting the tweeter is that you can actually do that :facepalm:
 

beagleman

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
1,159
Likes
1,582
Location
Pittsburgh Pa
Why not put the woofers closer together? The point of offsetting the tweeter is that you can actually do that :facepalm:
polk.jpg

Probably because of this mostly. This is from Crutchfield, that has a wide range of customers, from average everyday people to crazy audiophiles. IF you look at the ratings it got, apparently MOST are quite happy with the speaker as it is. I have never heard, nor owned this speakers, but that has to say something about whether it is hated or loved?
 
Top Bottom